Gagan Deep Sharma is an Indian researcher in economics and finance, a professor at Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University in New Delhi, and a prominent Punjabi poet. His areas of expertise include sustainable development, energy economics, green finance, and evolutionary economics. With over 20 years of experience in teaching, research, and industry, he has published more than 40 research papers in national and international journals.

Gagan Deep Sharma gave a lecture as a guest of the Ludovika Public Diplomacy Hub programme at Ludovika University of Public Service (LUPS) in Budapest.

***

The Trump administration punished India with a huge new tariff bacause India hadn’t given up buying Russian energy. Are there technical capabilities in India to diversify, to disconnect from the Russian resources?

Well, the point remains that we have a huge population in India. The largest population in the world is in India. We are home to 1.4 billion people. And as a country, the government has to take care of households, families, society, communities, and above all, sovereignty.

For example, I’d like to bring into perspective what Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said—that harmony with the European Union is important, but at the same time, what’s also important is the sovereignty of Hungary, mainly because they have to take care of their people and their businesses. Similarly, India has to take care of its 1.4 billion people, for whom we have to procure energy—and that too at an affordable price. We cannot afford to go too far and purchase expensive energy. We need affordability, because India is a developing country. Therefore, our priorities in terms of purchasing oil and energy come from the needs of our public, and the government has been absolutely responsible in making sure the public does not suffer.

We are not only relying on purchases from Russia. When it comes to nuclear energy, we did a nuclear deal with the US. Our nuclear energy comes from the USA, from Russia, and from France. So the priorities are set that way—and that’s what governments are for.

So you can’t give up Russian oil, because it’s the cheapest option. But America wants its allies to buy American energy—and wants to cut Russia off from its oil revenues.

I’m not saying that it will not be possible. In global politics, there is nothing like ‘no’. We have to see what kind of negotiation we can do, because we are already doing some trade negotiations with many parts of the world.

For example, we are sealing the deal with the European Union on a free trade agreement. Hopefully it will be done, and if it gets done, we are also open to European supplies of energy and to European supply chains. We are also close to finalizing the IMEC (India–Middle East–Europe Economic Corridor), which would run from Mumbai to Trieste in Italy. And of course, the American options are also very relevant for India. As we speak, I know that an American trade team is in New Delhi—they are negotiating. India–US relations are very relevant for the world, and they will be taken to new heights under the leadership of President Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

But the most important thing for us is not any other kind of alignment. We have been aligned with some countries—we are part of BRICS, we are part of the QUAD, we are part of the G20—so from that perspective, all our alignments are actually meant for people.

‘India–US relations are very relevant for the world, and they will be taken to new heights’

You call it strategic autonomy—it’s a kind of neutral position in making economic policy. But Mr Modi participated in the SCO summit in China alongside the leaders of China, Russia and North Korea. India is a part of the SCO, but Western analysts interpreted this as if India had given up its neutrality and joined the Eastern bloc against the Western world. Is that true?

I don’t think we should look at it from that perspective. If you look at ancient India, even then our policy was guided by a Sanskrit term—Vasudhaiva kutumbakam—which means ‘the entire world is one family’. Prime Minister Modi has echoed the same idea: to take everyone along. From that perspective, we are a very peaceful country. We do not want any conflicts—we do not indulge in conflicts unless we are forced into them. Of course, that’s important in the kind of geopolitical environment we’re living in, and that’s why it’s not surprising that we are present at the SCO.

When you look at it in the context of what the US and India have been doing—we have been doing very well.

Maybe the context in this case was a bit different: there was an agreement signed by China and Russia on the Siberia 2 gas pipeline, which indicates that Beijing is supporting the Russian war machine by purchasing Russian energy. Trump has given an ultimatum to Mr Putin to end the war in Ukraine, and now China appears to be siding with Russia. India’s appearance alongside them had strange optics and symbolism.

I think it’s more than just messaging—it’s about policymaking. The world tends to interpret everything as a message, because that’s the language we’re used to reading so often. But it’s not only about symbolism. The idea is that India has to live in harmony with its neighbours. And China is our neighbour, right? We have the largest population in the world, and China has the second largest. We’re very strong in the services economy, and China is very strong in manufacturing. In that sense, it’s a natural kind of alignment—there’s nothing unnatural about it.

If the world sees China and India as enemies, we are not enemies. We have been trading. Do you think any country can afford to be an ‘enemy’ in this kind of world? Prime Minister Modi has been equally friendly with Donald Trump and with President Putin. We are not living in a world where there are permanent enemies or fixed alliances. This is a different world from the one we knew 20, 30 or 40 years ago.

‘If the world sees China and India as enemies, we are not enemies. We have been trading’

All regional states in the Pacific trade with China or are already dependent on Chinese goods. India has a special position because it has a population of 1.5 billion and significant market value, so perhaps India is a rival economy. In what sectors can India compete with China?

Well, there can be a lot of debate and discussion about rivalry or about the competition between Indian and Chinese products. But the size of the markets we’re looking at is so huge that there’s room for both Chinese and Indian products. However, particularly over the past decade, the Indian government has actively pushed policy incentives towards manufacturing in India. Major companies like Apple have now based some of their production plants in India.

As for the service industry, we’ve long been recognized as one of the best in the world. That’s how we evolved—our GDP began to grow significantly after the 1990s. In IT-related sectors, our English-speaking population is a big advantage. In the US, many industries rely on Indian professionals. If you look at leadership positions—like Google’s CEO Sundar Pichai—he’s Indian. At Microsoft, and even with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, there’s a major presence in India.

In the early 2000s, during my early years in academia, I saw that some North American universities opened campuses in China. We were a bit late. But now, with the National Education Policy introduced in 2020, we’re seeing foreign universities entering India—like the University of Southampton opening a campus in Gurugram, or the University of York opening one in Mumbai. Our banking sector is also performing well. The State Bank of India is arguably one of the largest banks in the world. And over the past seven or eight years, there’s been a real boom in our startup ecosystem.

‘As for the service industry, we’ve long been recognized as one of the best in the world. That’s how we evolved’

So, in that way, the market space is really large, and rather than rivalry, we see things as complementing each other. One last example: a lot of Indian raw materials go from India to China, where they are processed and then sold back to India. With the development of IMEC, I believe many gates will open, and India will become a peaceful and efficient partner of the European Union as well, because Europe holds many opportunities.

I guess so. But IMEC itself represents a kind of rivalry, as it will be an alternative trade route to the Chinese project, the Belt and Road Initiative. Don’t you think there will be rivalry between the two giant states?

There is a difference in how we approach things. Probably we don’t see it as rivalry, but rather as the size of the pie—it’s better to share the pie.

So the IMEC project and the BRI project can function peacefully alongside each other, is this what you mean?

There will be countries that are probably part of both. For example, Russia. It’s a partner of both China and India, and China and India are also partners with each other. We will unlock a new segment of the market. In the Indian market, one bottle of average wine sells for about 20 euros, which sells here at 5 euros—in India, wine remains an aspirational alcoholic product, not preferred by many because it’s unaffordable. If we can make it affordable, if we can facilitate the import-export of wine, you can imagine the size of the market—it’s a huge opportunity. Similarly, footwear could be another big market. In India, we have very small companies producing footwear. If we can use the technology from Europe and cooperate, there are tremendous opportunities.

‘China and India are…partners with each other. We will unlock a new segment of the market’

And I think one positive aspect that the world is still not seeing from the SCO summit is that if India and China can come together and focus on their strengths, Chinese technology can be one strength that India can leverage. Similarly, the quality of human resources in India—the English-speaking skills and entrepreneurial spirit of Indians—can be an advantage. If we harness this, there is a lot of value to unlock. The size of the pie could double, and even if our share remains the same, the net volume would increase because the overall size would grow.

Pakistan is a rival state of India. China is investing heavily in security, infrastructure and solar panel systems in your neighbouring country. Maybe China hopes to gain some political influence there. Isn’t it troubling India?

What kind of rivalry can we have with Pakistan? Their economy is a different size. The only point of contention between India and Pakistan is terrorism. If our people are killed on our territory and the murderers come from a certain country, India has the right to defend its people. The current government’s policy is very clear: it will not spare anyone and will bring everyone to justice. Terrorism cannot be tolerated. While we are expanding the market and protecting people’s interests with new products, terrorism takes us years back. We are open to connecting India and Pakistan by road. We opened new border crossings because everyone wants harmony. That’s how modern society works. When Prime Minister Modi took office, he invited the Pakistan Prime Minister, and he himself visited Pakistan to build harmonious relations so we can move forward together, not backward. That is the true intention.

Related articles: